Over 1.1 million breast biopsies are performed each year in the United States alone. Of these, about 80% of the lesions excised during biopsy are found to be benign while about 20% of these lesions are malignant.
In the field of breast cancer, stereotactically guided and percutaneous biopsy procedures have increased in frequency as well as in accuracy as modern imaging techniques allow the physician to locate lesions with ever-increasing precision. However, for any given biopsy procedure, a subsequent examination of the biopsy site is very often desirable. There is an important need to determine the location, most notably the center, as well as the orientation and periphery (margins) of the subcutaneous cavity from which the lesion is removed.
For example, in cases where the lesion is found to be benign, a visual, noninvasive follow-up examination of the biopsy site is often performed to ensure the absence of any suspect tissue and the proper healing of the cavity from which the tissue was removed. Such follow-up examination is also performed where the lesion is found to be malignant and the physician is confident that all suspect tissue was removed and the tissue in the region of the perimeter or margins of the cavity is “clean”.
In some cases, however, the physician may be concerned that the initial biopsy failed to remove a sufficient amount of the lesion. Furthermore, in some percutaneous biopsy procedures, such as those using the Mammotome biopsy probe, it is very difficult to guarantee clean margins. Such a biopsied lesion is colloquially referred to as a “dirty lesion” or “having a dirty margin” and requires follow-up observation of any suspect tissue growth in the surrounding marginal area of the initial biopsy site. Thus, an excision around the original biopsy site must often be performed. In such a case, the perimeter of the cavity should preferably be identified, as the cavity may contain cancerous cells. Identification of the cavity perimeter is desirable to avoid the risk of opening the cavity, which could release and spread the cancerous cells. Moreover, the site of the re-excised procedure itself requires follow-up examination, providing further impetus for accurate identification of the location of the re-excised site. Therefore, a new marker may be placed after re-excision.
Prior methods of marking biopsy cavities utilize one or more tissue marking clips as the biopsy site-marking device. Most commonly, these marker clips have a “horseshoe” configuration. The marker clips attach to the walls of the cavity when the free ends or limbs of the “horseshoe” are pinched together, trapping the tissue. This device has significant drawbacks.
For instance, prior to placing the marker clip at the cavity site, care must be taken to remove residual tissue debris, typically by vacuum, to minimize the possibility that the marker clip attaches to any loose tissue as opposed to the cavity wall. Once the cavity is prepared, the clip must be examined to ensure that the limbs of the clip are substantially straight. If the limbs have been prematurely bent together, the clip will be discarded, as it will most likely not attach properly to the cavity wall. Actual placement of the clip often requires additional vacuum of the cavity wall to draw the wall into the aperture between the limbs of the marking clip so that a better grip is obtained between the limbs of the clip. Additionally, there is always the possibility that the clip may detach from the cavity wall during or after withdrawal of the tools used to place the clip into the cavity.
Aside from the problems inherent in the placement of the marking clip, there are also limitations associated with how well the marking clip can identify a biopsy cavity. As the marking clip must trap tissue for proper attachment, in cases of endoscopic, fluoroscopic, or blind placement, the clip can only be placed on a wall of the cavity substantially opposite to the opening of the cavity.
Moreover, patient concern limits the number of clips that may be placed in a cavity. As a result, the medical practitioner is forced to identify the outline of a three dimensional cavity by a single point as defined by the marking clip. Obviously, determination of the periphery of a biopsy cavity from one point on the periphery is not possible.
These limitations are compounded as the biopsy cavity fills within a few hours with bodily fluids, which eventually renders the cavity invisible to noninvasive techniques. Another difficulty in viewing the clip stems from the fact that the clip is attached to the side, not the center, of the cavity. This makes determining the spatial orientation and position of the cavity difficult if not impossible during follow-up examination. Additionally, during a stereotactic breast biopsy procedure, the breast is under compression when the marking clip is placed. Upon release of the compressive force, determining the location of the clip can be unpredictable, and any information once known about the orientation and location of the periphery of the cavity is lost.
The marker clip does not aid in the healing process of the biopsy wound. Complications and false information may arise if the marker strays from its original placement site. As described above, if a re-excision of the site is required, the marker clip may also interfere when excision of a target lesion is sought.
Other devices pertaining to biopsy aids are directed to assisting in the healing and closure of the biopsy wound, but they do not address the clinical need or desire of accurately preserving the location and orientation of the biopsy cavity. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,347,234; 5,388,588; 5,326,350; 5,394,886; 5,467,780; 5,571,181; and 5,676,146.
In cases where a biopsy excises lesion or tumor is suspected to be cancerous, it is desirable to determine whether any cancerous cells have spread from the site of the original lesion or tumor. A sentinel node (SN) is the first lymph node to receive drainage of lymphatic fluid and cells from a tumor or malignant growth. For various cancers such as malignant melanoma and breast cancer, identification of the SN is now a standard technique for determining whether cancerous cells have migrated to a lymph gland from the site of the original lesion or tumor. Increasing data suggests that the status of the SN may predict whether other nodes in the axilla (i.e. the armpit) harbor cancerous cells. Although identification of the SN may be desirable after some biopsy procedures, there are occasions where identification of the SN is desirable even though no biopsy procedure is performed. In fact, a thorough analysis of multiple sections (0.5-mm intervals) of a sentinel node or nodes is more likely to detect hidden micrometastases than a routine single-section examination of many regional nodes, including the sentinel node, according to Jannink et al. in “Serial Sectioning of Sentinel Nodes in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Pilot Study,” Annals of Surgical Oncology, 5(4):310-314.
Thus, accurately determining the location of a SN, permits removal of the SN to determine its pathology. If the SN does not contain cancerous cells, the cancer has not spread and the stage of the cancer can be determined. The ability to make this determination from an examination of the SN minimizes the number of lymph nodes removed and eliminates the need to remove additional lymph nodes. In a review in Breast Diseases: A Year Book® Quarterly Vol. 10 No. 3, of a paper by Hack et al., “Physical and Psychological Morbidity After Axillary Lymph Node Dissection for Breast Cancer,” J Clin Oncol 17:143-149, 1999, Vetto states that approximately 27% of patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy for early-stage breast cancer still require axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) due to the existence of a positive node. Accordingly, the remaining 63% of the patients could benefit by an SN biopsy and avoid having radical dissection.
Previously, it was impossible to locate the sentinel node without performing ALND. In the case of breast cancer, determining whether the cancerous cells migrated involved removal of all axillary lymph nodes. This required radical surgery. This painful option often lead to complications that resulted in significant morbidity and even mortality. As discussed by Hack et al., pain and discomfort after ALND significantly corresponded to quality of life after the procedure. According to Hack et al., patients with more than 13 lymph nodes dissected reported more pain than women with fewer lymph nodes dissected.
More recently, a technique known as “sentinel node biopsy” allowed for accurate mapping of a SN's location by the use of blue dye and a radioactive tracer, separately or in combination. Typically, a dye and/or a radioactive tracer are injected around the location of a tumor, into the biopsy cavity or tumor cavity (if the tumor was partially or completely removed), or “subdermally” into the parenchymal tissue anterior to the tumor. This latter technique is described by De Cicco et al. (1999) in “Lymphoscintigraphy and Radioguided Biopsy of the Sentinel Axillary Node in Breast Cancer,” J Nucl Med 39:2080-2084, 1998, and in a review of that article by Haigh et al. (1999) in Breast Diseases: A Year Book® Quarterly, Vol. 10 No 3. The dye migrates from the tumor site through the lymphatic channels to the regional lymph nodes that serve the cancerous tissue. The SN, which is the node most likely to be involved with cancer, is identified through surgery and removed for pathologic analysis. When a radioactive tracer is used, a gamma probe or like-device is used to further assist a physician in identifying the site of the SN.
Unfortunately, visualization of the blue dye depends upon the surgeon localizing it, and no preoperative assessment of mapping is possible. Therefore, the surgeon must first make an incision in the general vicinity of the lymph nodes, then dissect around the area to locate the blue dye. Another complication arises as the dye may cause an allergic reaction in some individuals. This reaction may leave a mark on the skin similar to a ‘tattoo.’
Using a radioactive tracer, alone or in combination with blue dye, to locate the SN also has some disadvantages. It is an interdisciplinary process, requiring nuclear medicine personnel, adherence to radiation safety regulations, preparation of the radiocolloid, and gamma detection instrumentation. Furthermore, the safety of this procedure is questionable. See e.g., Miner et al. (1999). “Guidelines for the Safe Use of Radioactive Materials During Localization and Resection of the Sentinel Lymph Node,” Ann Surg Oncol 6:75-82.
In the case of a lumpectomy, when the lesion is known to be cancerous, locating the SN is desirable so that the SN is removed in the same procedure as the lumpectomy. In fact, even if the pathology of the lesion is not yet known, there are reasons for initiating the SN localization during a breast biopsy procedure, as discussed below.
Previously, imaging techniques, such as ultrasound, MRI, and CT, attempted to non-invasively find and diagnose cancerous lymph nodes prior to removing them. However, according to Schlag. (1998). “The ‘Sentinel Node’ Concept: More Questions Raised than Answers Provided?” Oncologist 1998; 3(5):VI-VII, general criteria such as size, shape, structure, or texture in the various imaging modalities are unreliable, and these techniques result in low sensitivity and/or low specificity. As described by Veronesi et al. (1997). “Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph-nodes,” Lancet June 28; 349(9069):1864-7, in 32 (38%) of 85 patients with metastatic axillary nodes, the only positive node was the sentinel node. Accordingly, if all of the nodes were checked by imaging instead of locating and biopsying the SN, the chances of missing the cancer would likely have been much higher. Furthermore, because of usually low specificity, these techniques require surgical excision and examination of multiple lymph nodes, many of which may contain no cancer. In contrast, by identifying only one or a few SN's, without trying to make any diagnosis of cancer prior to tissue removal, the excision is much less extensive, yielding a smaller tissue sample. Also, the histological examination of one or a few SN's can be more thorough than the case where many lymph nodes require examination.
Therefore, one objective of the invention described herein is to provide a marking device, delivery device, and method that enable noninvasive determination of cavity location, orientation, and periphery.
Another objective of is to provide an atraumatic marking device that does not rely on pinching or piercing tissue.
Another objective is to provide a method of delivering through a small opening a marking device for marking the borders of a cavity.
Another objective is to provide a composition and method for localizing and marking a sentinel node.
Another objective is to provide a composition capable of (1) deposition in or around a lesion and migration to and accumulation in the associated sentinel node, and (2) noninvasive detection.
Another objective is to provide a method for remotely detecting the location of a sentinel node with a minimum of trauma and toxicity to the patient.
Yet another objective is to provide a composition and method for both marking a lesion cavity and locating the sentinel node in the same procedure.